Bug 30786309
If the Activity used in makeSceneTransitionAnimation isn't
the same one used in the startActivity call, a NullPointerException
could be thrown.
Change-Id: Id21c54fcf99b353feab62f7fc160997ed06e7d23
(cherry picked from commit 3289bfa289)
Which for en_US would be something like "Friday August 5th 2016" but may
be re-ordered for other locales. Dates are hard.
Bug: 30682782
Change-Id: I015d293526592add27ce8fada12cd58bcc274ccf
Bug: 30889568
Fixes an issue where mLayer didn't have
the mSurface set on it in certain resume
scenarios.
Change-Id: Ib75065d3d75e6141d6cd8f306584f6a569b9907c
This type behaves like a normal TYPE_APPLICATION, except that WM
will always wait for it to be drawn before starting a transition.
WM always waits for TYPE_BASE_APPLICATION (main window), but for
TYPE_APPLICATION, it only waits if the window relayouts to visible
and gets a surface before the main window is drawn. If main window
itself is ready very fast, transition could start without the other
window.
bug: 30830849
Change-Id: Ife71a9812db7c8eba6ee4ead10ce4f31d9e93b40
As discussed in ag/1192965/ we have a special case for rotation
animation selection in launch from double tap. This was set to
ROTATION_ANIMATION_CROSSFADE as the goal was just to avoid
ROTATION_ANIMATION_ROTATE on the viewfinder surface and
seamless rotation in launch scenarios was initially descoped. Now we
are aiming at fixing this though, and ROTATION_ANIMATION_CROSSFADE
does not quality for seamless rotation. ROTATION_ANIMATION_JUMPCUT
also would not be a good choice because in the situation that the
rotation occurs before the app starting window appears, then we would
jump cut from unrotated wallpaper to rotated app, I think we want
a crossfade in this scenario. To this end introduce and use a new @hide constant
ROTATION_ANIMATION_SEAMLESS which qualifies for seamless but falls back
to CROSSFADE if seamless can't occur.
Bug: 30171992
Change-Id: If1945b17b5159be4cd5ba0b139d6bea9f7fcca33
In Android N, View#isTemporarilyDetached() returns true if it is called
when the same View instance is handling View#onFinishTemporaryDetach().
Returning true there is, however, sometimes confusing, especially
scenarios like the following case:
@Override
public void onFinishTemporaryDetach() {
doSomeRestoringWorks();
}
private void doSomeRestoringWorks() {
doSomething();
}
private doSomething() {
if (isTemporarilyDetached()) {
// As of N, we hit here if this is called as a result of
// View#onFinishTemporaryDetach().
} else {
// but is the logic here is more likely to be appropriate
// when handling View#onFinishTemporaryDetach()?
}
}
What this CL aims to do is to let View#isTemporarilyDetached() return
false when it is called while handling View#onFinishTemporaryDetach(),
because it should make View#onFinishTemporaryDetach() more useful.
Regarding the app compatibility, View#isTemporarilyDetached() was added
in API 24 hence the impact on this change is still limited.
Bug: 30791718
Change-Id: If384da9f9e6ff849598896901626fd021bae5cda
On close/abort calls, which are more likely to run in parallel
with CameraDevice APIs.
Bug: 30742426
Change-Id: I6550283d1026373d48bb730164e65b25c7037bab
